Comments

TopGun

Other than issues relating to national security or military operations, EVERYTHING our government does should be a matter of public record. The people ARE the government, and the people we elected to office are not doing their job by keeping all of America in the dark about their activities. I've had several FOIA documents in my hands, and all of them looked like a piece of paper you'd see after giving a kid a marker and turning him loose on it.

By the time they get done blacking out what they don't want you to see, all you have is a piece of paper with scores of black lines on it. When they omit so much on one document, none of it makes any sense because key parts of it is missing relating to the subject at hand. From what I've seen, the FOIA is a joke. Maybe when they stop the nonsense and let us see what's really in these documents, it will have some validity to it.

TruthSeeker

I agree and most dems and republicans agree this is so UNLAWFUL that this will be in the SCOTUS soon, if they have the audacity to go forward with it.

The problem with this FCC study wasn’t just one or two questions. It’s that the FCC has no business involving itself in editorial judgment and news choices in the first place — especially at newspapers and Internet outlets. It’s an arrogation of jurisdiction, which would surely be followed by an arrogation of authority and power to address whatever “crises” in news reporting the study produces.

TruthSeeker

• What is the news philosophy of the station? • Who else in your market provides news? • Who are your main competitors? • How much news does your station (stations) air every day? • Is the news produced in-house or is it provided by an outside source? • Do you employ news people? • How many reporters and editors do you employ? • Do you have any reporters or editors assigned to topic “beats”? If so how many and what are the beats? • Who decides which stories are covered? • How much influence do reporters and anchors have in deciding which stories to cover? • How much does community input influence news coverage decisions? • How do you define critical information that the community needs? • How do you ensure the community gets this critical information?

TruthSeeker

• What is the news philosophy of the station? • Who is your target audience? • How do you define critical information that the community needs? • How do you ensure the community gets this critical information? • How much does community input influence news coverage decisions? • What are the demographics of the news management staff (HR)? • What are the demographics of the on air staff (HR)? • What are the demographics of the news production staff (HR)?

TruthSeeker

Oops...according to hotair****, the Obama administration/FCC goons decided to go ahead with it but deceitfully say they won't ask 'some' questions. Yeah right!

After a few days of public outrage over its study on editorial choice in newsrooms, the FCC will “amend” the research project — but still plans to conduct it. FCC chair Tom Wheeler will remove the questions in the study relating to news philosophy and editorial judgment, the commission announced, which leaves the question of what exactly the FCC will end up studying:

Faced with an outcry, the Federal Communications Commission’s chairman said Thursday that he would amend the effort — intended to assess whether the news media were meeting the public’s “critical information needs” — by removing questions that critics had deemed invasive. …

FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler responded to the growing furor Thursday by ordering the removal of questions about news philosophy and editorial judgment.

TruthSeeker

The First Amendment says "Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…" But under the Obama administration, the Federal Communications Commission is planning to send government contractors into the nation's newsrooms to determine whether journalists are producing articles, television reports, Internet content, and commentary that meets the public's "critical information needs." Those "needs" will be defined by the administration, and news outlets that do not comply with the government's standards could face an uncertain future. It's hard to imagine a project more at odds with the First Amendment.

Yeah more of the Obama administration's "failed attempt" to DICTATE what information the citizens get to hear or read about.

Must I really tell you that one day later, on Friday evening, the STUPID Constitution-ignoring POTUS and his liberal idiotic FCC goons decid

TopGun

Politics is a game of getting support from the poor, and money from the rich, and making both think you're protecting one from the other. Being a liar is a necessity, or so they think, when you enter politics, but Barack Obama has taken being a liar to a whole new level. Other than when he made comments like,"your energy bills will double or triple", has he made an honest statement since he became president.

He kept his promise that he would do everything in his power to kill coal, and he has nearly succeeded in doing that. Oddly enough, he managed to keep his promise when it concerns helping people, but lied his ass off about creating jobs. I've never seen anyone kill jobs quicker than he has, and likely won't again.

TruthSeeker

The rhinos in congress that liberals love so much told the clerk that reads the names/votes on the debt ceiling vote this past week not to read the names so the people wouldn't see them "change" their votes to the opposite of what they told their constituents they would vote! Rhinos, as well as liberals must be voted out of office ASAP!

TopGun

As of now, we can view public records that tell us who voted for what. I know they don't like that, because it gives us a means of policing the government by showing us who voted against specific legislation. Take that away, and the people will be in the dark.

I know Pelosi, Reid and several others would love nothing better than seeing it go by the wayside, since their sneaky, underhanded attacks would no longer be public record. I use the roll call vote website extensively to see who's doing what.

TruthSeeker

And all those 'opposing' it better have good and acceptable explainations for not voting for the 'transparency' of their actions! I doubt most will accept their answers however. Just threw you all a hint!

Dems already getting together along with rhino republicans to prevent the people from seeing how they vote. They are getting a little scared of consequences for upcoming elections! And they SHOULD BE. We won't forget any of these things on election day.

Thank God for elections. It's the ONLY time politicians pay any attention to the voters; THEIR BOSSES!